roundtable

Agent Review Panel

4–6 AI reviewers independently evaluate your code, plan, or docs, debate each other's findings, then a judge resolves disagreements. A Claude Code plugin that orchestrates structured multi-stance review. Each run costs roughly $3–$20 in Opus tokens and takes 6–15 minutes — built for high-stakes reviews, not routine code review.

▶️ Play the interactive version — pause, replay, jump to any stage. Your code/plan journeys Gather → Review → Debate → Verify → Adjudicate → Report. (static pipeline diagram)

Runs only on Claude Code surfaces (CLI, IDE extension, Desktop "Code" tab) and the Claude Agent SDK. Does not work on claude.ai web chat or the raw Anthropic API — see Surfaces & Requirements.

Quick Start

claude plugin marketplace add wan-huiyan/agent-review-panel
claude plugin install roundtable@agent-review-panel

Restart your Claude Code session — skills load at session start.

/plugin marketplace add wan-huiyan/agent-review-panel
/plugin install roundtable@agent-review-panel

Verify it loaded. In a fresh Claude Code session, type /roundtable:agent-review-panel with no arguments. The skill should introduce itself and ask what to review. If you get unknown command, see Troubleshooting. Migrating from an older install handle? See MIGRATION.md.

⚡ Recommended — add VoltAgent specialists. Reviews get noticeably sharper when VoltAgent specialist agents are installed: the panel auto-upgrades each reviewer to a real domain specialist (e.g. Security Auditor → voltagent-qa-sec:security-auditor) instead of a generic persona. Not installed? It falls back gracefully — nothing breaks.

claude plugin marketplace add VoltAgent/awesome-claude-code-subagents
claude plugin install voltagent-qa-sec@voltagent-subagents   # backs the core code-review personas

Add voltagent-lang, voltagent-data-ai, voltagent-infra, … as you need them (10 families, 130+ agents; the /plugin … REPL form works too — takes effect next session). Why it's worth it → Sharper reviews with VoltAgent. (VoltAgent installs through Claude Code's plugin system.)

Use:

> Review this implementation plan from multiple perspectives: docs/my_plan.md

> /roundtable:agent-review-panel

Natural-language invocation also works ("red team this", "stress-test this design", "get a panel review of …").

What you get — three files written to your current working directory:

• review_panel_report.md — executive summary, consensus, judge-resolved disagreements, action items
• review_panel_process.md — verbatim "director's cut" of every reviewer's output
• review_panel_report.html — interactive dashboard with expandable issue cards, charts, and a panel gallery

See Sample output below for what a real report looks like.

When to use it — and when not

Use a panel for: high-stakes plans you'd want a second/third/fourth opinion on; security-sensitive code; architecture decisions that are expensive to reverse; docs that have to be right; "I'm too close to this — stress-test it."

Don't use a panel for (use a single review or /review instead): a quick look before pushing; type-error fixes; routine code review; addressing existing PR comments; "what does this code do?"; deployments; writing tests or docs from scratch.

The key signal is multiple independent perspectives — if one opinion would do, you're paying 4–6× more for nothing.

Why a panel, not a single reviewer?